A statement from the victim, read in court, said she felt afraid to go to work because the culprit “could be waiting for me around the corner.”

She said: “I was mortified that someone I knew and trusted could do that to me. He’s a friend to my children and has been welcome in my house. This will have far-reaching consequences for the whole family.”

Marie Hayden, prosecuting, said the stalking campaign started when the victim received a call to her mobile at around 4am on May 17.

She said: “The victim asked ‘who is it?’ but the man made moaning sounds and carried on heavy breathing. She believed the sounds were coming from a male. She asked who it was again and then put the phone down.”

The court heard further calls were made and the victim answered again at 4.35am.

Mrs Hayden said: “She answered and heard a male voice saying ‘do you like that?’ and making sexually-explicit remarks.”

The court she woke the next day to find 48 missed calls from a withheld number.

Further calls were made in the early hours of May 23.

Mrs Hayden said: “This was pretty distressing because at the time the victim’s sister was in hospital having a baby and she needed her phone to find out if everything was okay.”

Michael John Jacobs, 34

The victim discovered the truth in June after calling her service provider Vodafone and being given the defendant’s number.

Mrs Hayden said that when the victim confronted Jacobs he denied making the calls, saying he must have “leant on his phone.”

However when police examined his phone records, calls made to the victim’s phone matched the times she was called from the withheld number.

Speaking outside court, she told the Echo: “It made me sick to my stomach. I do feel like he’s got away with it.”

Miriam Sutton, representing Jacobs, said the mitigation she could provide was “limited” due to her client “not accepting full culpability for his actions”.

She described Jacobs was a “family man” who provides for his children.

District Judge Richard Clancy, sentencing, said: “You have to accept the consequences of what you have done.”

He was ordered to complete a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement with the Probation Service and told to pay a £180 criminal court charge, an £80 victim surcharge and £85 prosecution costs.

Jacobs was also prohibited from contacting the victim under the terms of an indefinite restraining order.